Under review: How to avoid a NATO-only approach to UK defence

Problem

Hot on the heels of an EU-UK summit and the signing of a defence and security partnership between Britain and the European Union, Keir Starmer’s government has published its long-awaited strategic defence review, meant to serve as a roadmap for British defence policy over the next decade.

The review, clocking in at 144 pages, is rich in detail on threat landscapes, new capabilities and the role to be played by new technologies, (if somewhat less clear on funding). But Europe as a strategic actor is missing almost entirely. Where “Europe” is mentioned, it is only as a geographic entity and stage for geopolitical confrontation. The EU itself is only mentioned three times in the review.

Increasing British defence spending, modernising equipment, and boosting reserve numbers are all sensible steps. They will contribute toward enhanced European credibility on defence even in the absence of deeper institutional cooperation, simply through their political symbolism and the reality of geography. But at a moment where America’s commitment to NATO is increasingly coming into question and common European action on defence is growing—more of which is taking place within EU structures—Britain risks being left out in the cold.

Solution

There are, however, a number of key short-term steps London can take with the EU and its member states to deepen their relationship and ensure that the review’s “NATO First” approach doesn’t become a “NATO Only” one.

On industrial questions, both sides should build on last week’s announcement of a security and defence partnership and move quickly to negotiate Britain’s accession to the EU’s SAFE instrument. This would grant UK industry access to €1.5bn in loans for defence investments and allow the EU to benefit from the UK’s powerful defence industrial base. The two sides should also work to implement the rest of the agreement as soon as possible.

The fact that the UK is considering developing an air-based component of its nuclear deterrent (in addition to its sea-based one) amounts to a tacit admission from London that America’s nuclear umbrella can no longer be taken for granted. But the proposal is still centred around the acquisition of American F-35 jets, illustrating just how uncomfortable the UK is with thinking beyond a transatlantic framework.  The UK and key European allies should therefore work in parallel to increase strategic consultations on their respective approaches to nuclear issues. They should also consider ways that British nuclear doctrine could be adapted to supplement a more limited US contribution to European deterrence in the future.

Finally, London should continue to expand its bilateral and minilateral relationships with EU member states on defence, identifying arenas for possible cooperation on a flexible, case-by-case basis, if necessary, within the organising framework of EU initiatives like the Permanent Structured Cooperation.

Context

While not binding, the strategic defence review will serve as a framework to guide UK defence policy over the next decade, with prime minister Keir Starmer having committed the government to implementing its 62 recommendations.

Compared to its 2021 predecessor, the Integrated Review, the Strategic Defence Review rejects former prime minister Boris Johnson’s vision of a “Global Britain”, instead situating the UK firmly within a ‘NATO-first’ security framework, with the war in Ukraine and Russian aggression identified as the main challenges.